Residents of an apartment building in Sydney recently found themselves embroiled in a peculiar parking dispute. Upon waking up one morning, they discovered handwritten post-it notes stuck to the front of each letterbox in their building. The notes, which were plastered all over the unit block in Lakemba, in the city’s west, read, “Remove ur (sic) car immediately from parking-2 This is paid parking.” At least 30 identical notes were seen, with a picture posted on Reddit on Thursday. However, by Friday morning, all the notes had mysteriously disappeared.
To shed light on the situation, a property listing for a studio apartment in the complex revealed that a secure car space was available for an additional $10 per week. The real estate listing also mentioned that there are 34 double studios in the apartment complex, with secure basement parking for only 16 cars. It seems that the limited number of parking spaces and the hefty weekly fee led one resident to become infuriated enough to go to the trouble of handwriting a message to each apartment occupant.
This incident sparked a debate online about off-street parking requirements. One commenter mentioned that newer buildings are required to provide parking spaces, typically one space for every two bedrooms. However, this particular building seemed to have more apartments than available parking spaces. Another commenter suggested that by not including the car spaces in rent, control of the spaces could be maintained and subletting prevented. Additionally, vacant apartments are more attractive if parking is available.
In December 2023, the Department of Planning, Housing, and Infrastructure announced two new Draft State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) – the draft low to mid-rise housing and draft transport-oriented development. The draft low to mid-rise housing SEPP aims to facilitate the development of affordable and diverse housing in suitable locations for every stage of life. It includes changes to floor space ratio and parking amenities.
The City of Canterbury Bankstown council, which has jurisdiction over Lakemba, expressed concerns about a “one-size-fits-all” approach in its submission to the NSW government’s housing policy changes. The council stated that it believes the current parking requirements should continue to apply. They mentioned ongoing investigations into revised parking controls for town centers near stations as part of their master planning program. The council also plans to conduct a review of Lakemba.
Canterbury-Bankstown council expressed concerns about the proposed parking rate reduction for larger dual occupancies, as it is expected to increase the demand for on-street parking. They emphasized that residential streets were not designed to accommodate extensive on-street parking resulting from very large dual occupancies. The council will recommend that the NSW government uphold their current dual occupancy controls in its submission.
Overall, this parking dispute in Lakemba highlights the ongoing challenges faced by residents in crowded urban areas. The limited availability of parking spaces and the increasing cost of parking can lead to frustration and disputes among neighbors. It also underscores the importance of effective planning policies that consider the needs and aspirations of the community while ensuring orderly and well-managed growth. As the City of Canterbury Bankstown council makes its submission to the NSW government, it remains to be seen how these issues will be addressed and resolved.
